Tough Love, and The Comfort Zone

In my former post, Semper Fidelis, I never used the term 'tough love' but spoke about how it is an integral part of being a good friend, good parent, or a patriot. In my former post, Two Types of Control, I talked about how complacency and living in the comfort zone leads leads away from service and openness. Now I'd like to tie those two concepts together.

My definition of 'tough love' would be to make someone you care about uncomfortable, so that they see the need for a change that would benefit them. So how far would you take 'tough love?' Far enough to lead them out of the comfort zone!

I believe this concept should translate to many different circumstances. If an employee is consistently not complying with company policy or unproductive, a manager's 'tough love' would be to gradually decrease their comfort level while being clear about the desired behavior. In foreign policy, if a country is acting up they should gradually have sanctions increased on them while making the target behavior clear, until they come around.

Clear communication of needs is important, otherwise 'tough love' could be misinterpreted as aggression or antipathy. Trying to communicate empathy rather than antipathy when applying sanctions can be difficult and frustrating at times, and will take extra effort.

Let me switch tracks at this point and talk about 'insulation.' If you want someone to keep doing what they are doing, to not change their behavior you would 'insulate' them from their need to change.

"An increasingly prosperous, self-confident state felt truly united in August 1914, perhaps for the first time. Four years of war-- not only the bitter, pointless trench warfare, but also the long queues and hunger at home-- set Germans at each other's throats. Hitler's analysis-- as a former soldier in the trenches-- was that the World War I had been lost on the homefront. In order to be successful, the Nazi movement had to woo the German consumer in a way that he (and, in particular, she) wasn't during the First World War." (p. 27 of Seduced by Hitler, by Adam LeBor & Roger Boyes)

How did Hitler insulate his populace, to keep them compliant? One way was that he blamed any problems that Germany had on others, mainly the Jews. The German people were relieved of responsibility. Jewish possessions were confiscated and auctioned off at discount prices so that Germans were made more comfortable. Hitler actively promoted things to help the German people, like the Autobahn and the Volkswagen. To the German populace he was very upbeat in promoting personal excellence and acheivement. And he actively engaged in propaganda to further insulate the German people from the truth, and keep them in their comfort zone.

So the person like myself, that seeks the truth, has to ask himself some important questions. Are we being kept compliant, in a comfort zone? If we are, how? Here are some directions of thought to discover the answer to those questions:
1.) Are we making any sacrifices (rationing, for example) for the war effort, like we did in WWII? Or are we engaging in war profiteering instead? Link Link Link Link Link Link Link
2.) Are we blaming other people (many, but illegal aliens are a good example) for the problems we have? Link Link Link
3.) Are we experiencing propaganda in the news media? Link Link Link Link

By all means, don't make the mistake of thinking too much, if you want to be comfortable.

Former Dittohead Voted Today!

I just finished the book Confessions of a Former Dittohead by Jim Derych. I didn't know there were people like me out there! You see, I'm also a former dittohead. A dittohead is someone who is a complete and unabashed fan of the likes of Rush Limbaugh, or Bill O'Reilly. I used to listen to those guys, admired their non-PC approach, and thought they were telling me the truth. So how did a lifelong Christian Republican like myself go over to the 'other' side? Mr. Derych describes his conversion as like the death of a thousand cuts, and for me it was that way too.

It's hard to precisely define just what was the first cut. Perhaps it was the months of chatting with a beautiful dying woman named Noelle. She had been a nurse, and had contracted Hepatitis C from her contact with the blood of a patient. Frequently she had problems keeping any food down, and the only thing that relieved her condition and allowed her to eat and allowed her to continue to live, was medicinal marijuana. Later I was to find out that my staunchly religious grandmother who was dying from colon cancer had to have something similar slipped to her without her knowlege in her last days. So I no longer come to the judgement that anyone who uses medicinal marijuana is just a 'pot-head.' Some people need it, and I know that is true.

Then, in the late 90's I had a coworker with whom I would engage from time to time in philosophical discussions. After a great deal of night shifts, over several hours each shift, he finally convinced me that the death penalty, something I firmly believed in up to that point, was uncivilized, inhumane, and was subject to incompetence or outright abuse of the justice system. I began to ask myself how people (Republicans) could fight for abolishing abortion and yet feel the need for the death penalty, for vengeance.

For some reason, although I never listened to my union's advice before, in the year 2000 I decided to vote for the person that would benefit the working man (me) the most, regardless of party. I had faithfully voted Republican up until this point, but now I grudgingly voted for Al Gore. I was ashamed of myself for voting for a Democrat, and told no one. I was a bit relieved when George W. Bush was elected instead, and for the longest time I never admitted to anyone that I voted for Gore. I thought Bush was an embarassment that would give the world the impression that we are a nation of idiots, but at least he was Republican and not a lying, wacko
liberal.

Then came 9-11. I was off of work, and spent that entire week in front of the TV. I was in shock, as were many others. Picking my kids up from school I saw a couple of men in turbans. I realize now that they were probably East Indian or something similar, but at the time I hated them to my core. God help me, I really hated them. And yet, they were there to get their kids, just like I was.

One night my wife and I were watching a documentary on the beef industry. I'm sure the makers of the documentary didn't intend to turn people into vegetarians, but after seeing the sorry state of our system, from the raising of the cattle to the butchering, inspection, and handling of the meat, I realized that our system is outdated and ineffective. I began to read, to discover for myself about our food. By chance I discovered John Robbins, who in a fit of conscience (actually deep inner conviction) gave up his inheritance, the entire Baskin Robbins empire. I highly recommend any and all of his books, as they are heavily annotated and footnoted with all the references for every fact he presents. He is very heavy on presenting the facts, and it overwhelmed me that our food industry and corporations have bought their politicians and along with a few other corporations are running and ruining our country.

The war raged in Afganistan, and I agreed it was necessary to eradicate the Taliban. Then Bush decided to take the war to Iraq. I watched C-span, and saw the presentations that Colin Powell and the rest gave. I saw when we pulled the inspectors out of Iraq, a couple of days before the first attack. I thought the evidence and reasons were flimsy, but I still trusted my Republican government, that they knew something I didn't. It annoyed me that they wouldn't just come right out and say why they wanted to invade Iraq, instead of trying to make up theories about what WMD the Iraqis might theoretically have.

Then in 2004 I proudly voted for John Kerry, although I was and still am registered Republican. I was impressed by how presidential he acted. I thought it was great that he didn't stoop to the level of the Bush team with the swiftboat slander. Kerry is a dignified, principled, and civilized man of honor. I could not, and I still can't, believe that we hear so much talk about honoring our veterans and yet when we are presented with a bona fide war hero that people, especially veterans, would tolerate him being 'swiftboated.' Even if they wanted to eliminate him from consideration for the presidency, if they themselves had any honor as veterans they should never trash a fellow veteran like that.

From hearing about all the action from celebrities and political groups to get the vote out for Kerry, I thought it was certain that he would be elected. But it didn't go down as expected. But wait a minute. How many reported problems were there with the voting? More than 350,000 people were denied the vote in Ohio, yet Bush took Ohio by something like 150,000? There weren't enough machines in areas that vote mostly Democrat, causing people to have to wait for hours to vote? Many people in Florida were denied their vote because they'd been mistakenly put on a felon's list. Wait a minute, what's going on here? How come the exit polls differ so much from the actual votes, when it has been established in elections around the world that one of the primary ways to discern whether or not the election has been rigged is to look at the exit polls? And yet now the story is that the exit polls are notoriously incorrect? What?

But absolutely the very last straw was something I could not explain away. When it came out that many of our ports operations were being sold to the United Arab Emirates, the light finally went on in my head, because there are only two possible conclusions a logical person could come to. It is a fact that several (OK, actually two) of the 9-11 terrorists came from the UAE. It is a fact that the (financing of the) training for the 9-11 terrorists came from the UAE. It is a fact that the UAE was paying for the 9-11 terrorists housing and food. So, if Bush and his puppeteers are so intent on selling off the operations of our ports to these known terrorists, at the very least one of the following must be true. Either A) our administration is completely and totally incompetent to not know this and seek business, or B) our administration is not worried that the UAE will do any mischeif. Why? The only explanation for 'B' is that our government was somehow directly involved in the setup and enactment of 9-11. Can anyone come up with another scenario?

Then we have the various and sundry ever-changing reasons for going to Iraq, and another conundrum. Rumsfeld has come out and said that we had bad intelligence, aw shucks, oh well, he's not in the intelligence business after all. What? Isn't he in charge of the Defense Intelligence Agency? He's secretary of Defense, and he knows nothing about intelligence? What? OK, so what if we give them the benefit of the doubt, that they were taken in by bad intelligence. Then why are we still fighting? The government of Iraq is GONE, and we are left fighting and killing the people of Iraq, but it's OK that we are doing all this carnage because of bad intel? If we acted purely on bad intel, shouldn't we apologize? Shouldn't we make reparations? Shouldn't we rebuild and restore as much as we can, and back out giving them their country back? And if incompetence is the reason, shouldn't those responsible, be responsible? Shouldn't they lose their job and maybe go to jail?

At a recent speech at West Point, Mister Bush compared himself to former president Harry S. Truman. Truman was famous for the saying, "The Buck Stops Here." But where does the buck stop for Mister Bush? Bush says he now realizes that he shouldn't have said, "Bring 'em on." That's not an apology, and does nothing to fix the mess that happened on his watch, that he should be taking responsibility for.

This is blindingly, horrendously, and stupendously a nightmare, is it not? If there ever was such a thing as the Republican party it must be dead, and these guys in charge are most definitely not Republican. The party of Lincoln was for limited government, not increased government. The party of Lincoln was for fiscal responsibility, not spending more in one presidents watch than all previous presidents spent, combined.

So that's how I went from being a weak conservative to being a strong and proud liberal.

Citizens of Where?

For so long in my life I have been proud to be an American. I hold dearly the image of the John Wayne movies, the baseball and apple pie, the fighting spirit that says we know we're right, and then plays philanthropist to people of other nations. We were so good, at least that was what we thought. We didn't really see the back-room deals that politicians and corporate hit men did on our behalf, to ensure that we could continue in our opulent standard of living. We would not have accepted any truth that showed up that contradicted this glorious ideal, and every time that the light dawns on one of us, and we try to pass on this epiphany? Every 'prophet' is smeared, denegrated, rejected. We haven't wanted to see the truth.

What is left of our American ideal? If lying, cheating, stealing, bribery, rendition and incarceration without due legal process, torture, and even murder and executions are now considered 'OK' then what do we have left? There is nothing left but our memories and, our flag.

I love our US flag. I love the stars and stripes, and what it used to mean. But everything changes.
You see, I was born in San Antonio, Texas. Same town as the Alamo. I'm very proud of my southern heritage, the bravery of our men, and even Dixie. To me, although we lost the civil war, we bravely fought for our independence from the North. I can't help but be proud of this, our southern spirit, our identity.

But what does 'Dixie' (the Confederate flag) mean to most people nowadays? African Americans and most progressive folks look at that flag and, rightly so, see hate. That flag didn't represent hate years ago, I'd swear to it. But it does now, which saddens me. Because I reject racism and hate, and because I desperately want to bring peace, I dare not fly that flag. That flag no longer represents the good things that it used to, for us of the South.

There used to be a people of a very strong industrial nation, who valued all the same good values that we say we do. And they loved their country. Their flag, to them, did not represent hate, or genocide, as the Nazi flag now represents. When they looked at their flag they saw patriotism, positivity, connection, faith. Now for the whole world, the Nazi flag represents nothing admirable, only hate and destruction.

How long will it be before our dear Stars and Stripes become a symbol of hatred? You think accidentally letting the flag touch the ground dirties it? What about when the meaning of the whole thing becomes despicable? Where will we be then? Who will we be then? How long will the whole world put up with us, before we are 'taken out?' How long will God just let us trample and stomp and grab and use and digest and pollute and kill, before stepping in? How much can we eat? How much gas can we burn today? How many trees can we cut down? Can we buy another house, another all terrain sport recreational utility vantrucksportscar? Hmm, should I get the 22" wheels or go with 25"? What if I could get 40", or 80"? Hey homies, check my shoes! Some kid got 20 cents for making them, and I bought them for $200!

Our dear flag is already muddied. Our dear flag is already acting on those of other countries as a red flag to a bull. By allowing corporations to rule us in their worship of money, and by our worship of convenience and comfort, and money, we have become hypocrites to the nth power.

When I looked around for information on the Statue of Liberty, I found this:

"By the time the Union France-Americaine got around to delivering the statue, Napoleon III was gone. And again, the statue served the purpose of French liberals, in emphasizing that France was now "a Republic, not an Empire"…as the saying goes.

Some Americans sardonically wondered why France, which had a shortage of Liberty, should be exporting it to the U.S., which had plenty.

"I will try to glorify the Republic and Liberty over there, in the hope that someday I will find it again here."

-- Frederick Bartholdi to Édouard Laboulaye, 1871

I submit to you that the entire Statue of Liberty has changed meaning. We were to light a beacon of hope for all the world. But we no longer have liberty to offer. Our country as we knew it, is gone.

I am so ANGRY at the rest of you people who call yourselves American. Where are the people that regret the demolition of Native American peoples? Where are the people who sincerely regret enslaving Africans? Where are the people who are so desperately sorry for internment of Japanese Americans during the 2nd World War? Can't any of you see that we are now committing ALL NEW CRIMES, things that we can NEVER atone for?

When a theif steals, he is caught, the stolen items recovered, and he is punished. We, or our representatives, have stolen on our behalf. What do you think will happen, in the natural order of things? HOW MERCIFUL DO YOU EXPECT OTHERS TO TREAT US?

I believe we can yell and scream and plead until we're blue in the face, and it won't change a thing. What will? I think there will be many more troops that will give their lives for their country that started this unprovoked war. Halliburton, Kellogg Brown and Root, and a few other companies will make billions more. There will be less and less outcry as our freedoms disappear, until the tipping point, where people have had enough. Then there will be many protestors shot by riot police. Entire cities will be locked down with martial law. Some will disappear in the middle of the night, spirited away to detention facilities built or renovated by Kellogg Brown & Root. Then, because there is no other way of protesting, many will go on hunger strikes, and many will starve. Eventually the thing that brings change may come down to a business decision, because all this can't go on without these greedy corporations losing profits.

Is it too late? Are we caught in a trap of our own making?

Ultimately, for those of faith in God, we have to keep reminding ourselves that we are just passing through, that we are really citizens of a heavenly nation. The greatest commands say nothing of political reform, but instead say to love God and your fellow man. If all we can do is act out our love, supporting each other, that is enough.

Two Types of Control

I was thinking about a few things today, and I had some insights.

When people say, "Might makes right" they are implying that strength wins out over truth, over standards. But where does skill come into play?

In just about any sport positive control takes a higher priority than strength. By positive control I mean words like discipline, focus, training, skill, accuracy. Positive control is an intelligent mental outgrowth, unlike strength. Strength always follows skill for a successful athlete.

But what happens when skill is not present? With the absence of skill, continued control becomes oppressive. Continued attempt to control may resort to lying, cheating, or stealing.

Have you noticed that when a company starts out small and humble, they are usually very popular with customers because they are so ready to serve. Service is #1 at this stage. The customer is always right. Then, their success tells them that they don't have to try so hard for your business, so they don't. They become complacent and comfortable. Then as their competition starts to take some of their business away they realize that they need to get on the ball, so they institute controls, which over time become dictatorial and oppressive. Some in management may decide to cut back on the work force, but the company continues it's downward spiral. That's because the workers are the ones doing the service work that originally gave the company it's initial positive reviews and purpose in life, and cutting them puts the company just that much further in the hole. The company has forgotten its roots, and maybe just doesn't care that much about it.

Negative control is dictatorship, and is directly opposed to service, even though it came from service originally. But it is said, "Pride goeth before the fall."

So how can we change that entity's course from a negative controlling dictatorial style, back to a service based and customer centered style? The complacency and comfortability need to be strongly attacked. The comfort zone needs to shrink. Get rid of the callouses and become sensitive again to others needs.

Where are the callouses? Where is the comfort zone?

My Wittenberg Door List, Item #1

Okay, before I lose you all-- I know it seems that I keep coming back to religious themes, and some of you readers may not be religious people at all. I empathize with you, and I do not want to repel you! Stick around, as I believe in trying to figure out how messed up things are nowadays there are insights to be discovered in the study of the culture of the players involved.

For those of you that don't know, let me give you some background before I dive in.

In 1517 Martin Luther nailed a list of 95 items to the door of a church in Wittenberg, Germany. What he listed were the areas where he thought the church had strayed from the practice of true Christianity. This was the beginning of a tremendous splitting of the church, and was the birth of the protestant reformation.

So, as the title of this post states, here is one of the stumbling blocks I believe is hurting the church nowadays.

SOLA SCRIPTURA
Here is how the current Wikipedia entry states it:

"Sola Scriptura (Latin: By Scripture alone) is one of five important slogans of the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century. Although there is no agreed-upon technical definition among Protestants, it generally meant that Scripture, as interpreted by the individual believer, is the only inerrant rule for deciding issues of faith and morals."

Here are the problems I think are raised by this focused approach:

1. Sola Scriptura separates faith and morals (and spirituality) from the rest of human experience. Were we made by God to live such a splintered existence? E.G. -- should we live one way on Sunday, and live another way the rest of the week? Does our faith not apply at our place of business?
2. I don't believe it is strictly Biblical. Look at the teachings of Jesus, the parables. Did Jesus only stick to scripture for teaching materials? Did the apostles? No. And I don't think the first century church did either, from the archeological evidence of the Essenes.
3. Many Old Testament people did not have the scripture that we have nowadays, and their instruction by God came in many ways at many times. It is speculated by people like Joseph A. Seiss in his book The Gospel in the Stars, and E.W. Bullinger in The Witness of the Stars, that before there was the written scripture that we have, God used the stars as scripture. I think ancient people had an openmindedness that us modern worshippers lack.
4. I think Sola Scriptura, while appearing to be the safest approach, is actually a dangerous approach to modern Christian living because it leads to misuse. It leads people to the very thing that Martin Luther objected to, which was making the church exclusionary, like a country club. It leads to people misusing the scripture to exclude the people they don't want. Jesus was hated and criticised by the religious leaders of his day for including common sinners into his circle when he ate and drank with them.
   
5. Essentially, by only only accepting God via Sola Scriptura, we are saying that no other communication can ever come from God! Is that where we want to be?

So what is the alternative? Prima Scriptura, where scripture has prominence and leads understanding and teaching. Isn't that more reasonable?

Everything that is outside the Bible can not be rejected as sources of study and learning when you are talking about the whole of our existence. This would be ridiculous. I sure hope the airplane pilot has studied more than the Bible, to be certified as a pilot. If someone takes me to court I would first get a lawyer that is well versed in the laws of this land. The Bible is not anti-scientific, but it is not a scientific journal either. Do you have to reject Christianity if you are a pilot, a scientist, or a lawyer (leave it...leave it...)? No! I completely reject this faulty direction of thought-- that you can separate and compartmentalize God and faith from the rest of your life.

There is most definitely truth that is not expressed in the Bible. As an example, did every married couple in the Bible have a marriage ceremony? Does it state that for each couple? It doesn't? Then, if you believe 'sola scriptura' then they weren't married because the Bible doesn't explicitly say they had a marriage ceremony! Either that, or you'd have to say that marriage is purely having someone as mate. And if you do need the ceremony, then which culture's ceremony is acceptable and which is not?

For every person mentioned in the Bible, does it say that each of them had to eat, drink, sleep? Sola Scriptura! If it's not mentioned then they didn't have to! You see, this is utterly ridiculous.

If you are a person of faith, your faith permeates your entire being, every nook and cranny. Whether you are an athiest, Christian, Jewish, Muslim, or Buddist, you can't deny that whatever gave you life gave you a brain to use. For persons of faith, if your faith is worth more than a tin whistle, you must believe that the creator wants you to use your brain, and that the creator is not offended, challenged, or threatened by you asking questions and discovering what is laid in front of you. Seek, and ye shall find.

Semper Fidelis

Semper Fidelis, and being a good friend, parent, and patriot

What do these words mean to you?

Let's start with what it means to be a good friend. Friends don't let friends drive drunk. Right? If your friend starts getting into a relationship with an insane person, wouldn't you let them know? If your friend is happily married and then begins to 'play around' wouldn't you call them to task? Wouldn't you, being the good friend that you are, slap them around if you needed to, for their own good? Of course you would, if you were a good friend.

What does it mean to be a good parent? Does it mean that you stand by them and defend them regardless of whatever your child gets involved in? If you catch them shoplifting, would you take them back to the store, knowing that the lesson learned would help shape your child's moral fiber and better ensure their successful future? Or would a good parent just say, "Don't do it again"? I'm not asking if you would love them, regardless of their deeds. Of course you would still love them. You love them, and that's why you call them on the carpet, if you were a good parent.

What would a true patriot do, if he thought his country was wrong? Wouldn't you fight to get things changed, so that your country could be it's best? When someone says, "America, love it or leave it!" what are they saying, that if I love America I must accept tagging, inner city poverty, pollution, baseball players on steroids, or whatever? Wouldn't you fight the changing of tax laws, or the construction of a toxic waste dump site behind your house? Of course! But if you do not accept America, warts and all, does that mean that you hate America?

Unfortunately, I've never been a part of the U.S. Marine Corps. I do hold them in very high esteem however. I had a friend years ago, who had been in the Marines. Actually, he would correct me that, "Once a Marine, always a Marine!" The motto of the Marines is 'Semper Fidelis' which means 'always faithful' or 'forever true.' Maybe someone can clarify this for me, because I'm just a civilian. If you are faithful and true to your country, wouldn't you absolutely give your life to protect it from enemies, foreign or domestic? I know, you do this, and I am grateful. And a marine will never leave his buddy behind, right? I'm not trying to question the value or standards or worthiness of the US Marine Corps. What I am questioning is some of the civilian public who, seems like to me, have the impression 'Semper Fi' means we shouldn't question our leaders, who are supposed to work for us. If 'Semper Fi' means unquestioning loyalty, this is loyalist thinking, and therefore not something our founding fathers would have tolerated. It is certainly not how we civilians should be thinking.

What if members of the crew or the passengers on the Titanic could have sounded the alarm and turned the ship from disaster, kept it from hitting the iceberg? Would they have been asked, "What! You don't like this ship? You're always free to jump off!"

My mom used to tell me, "If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything!" So it pains me to no end when media corporate shills try desperately to defend the misdeeds and incompetence of this administration by saying that those who have a problem with it are unpatriotic. Radio talk show host Randi Rhodes clarifies, "It is not 'America, right or wrong,' it's 'America, when it's right it's right, and when it's wrong I right it!'

I think a forever faithful and forever true patriot would be a good friend to the constitution and the commonwealth, and would not stand for harm to come to it, even from within, even from ourselves. A faithful and true patriot is also like a good parent that would seek to guide their children always to excellence. Do you think I'm stretching it too far with the 'parent' analogy? Isn't our efforts at government, and hence this country's future, completely and totally linked to the future of our children?

Alcoholics and drug addicts depend on enabling people to continue in their addiction, because enablers never take them to task over what they are doing. Let us NEVER be enablers hiding behind a pseudo-patriotic (and false) 'Semper Fi' that says, "I don't care," and ALWAYS equate 'Semper Fi' with actually giving a damn. Then we can all say, "Semper Fi!"

Racism

I don't think it's just me who sees more and more racism in the news lately. But I think that if an intelligent person just takes the time to think through some basic truths, he or she would have to discard racism on an intellectual basis.
Unfortunately, there are the things that a person knows intellectually, and then there is the ingrained emotional patterns of thinking, programmed in us from childhood, that taint our view of others. This latter emotional programming can only get turned around by personal experiences, meditation, and time. This is hard work, and your formerly walled-off and protected inner self may feel in danger! Deciding to open the lines of communication between yourself and those of other races and actually doing so, for me at least, has felt like a march to the gallows. In contrast, the smashing of the intellectual reasons for racism is fairly easy, though not entirely painless.
Let me say something controversial, and then persuade you of the truth of it. Creationists and evolutionists both believe the same thing.

"WHAT? OMG, HOW CAN HE SAY THAT?"

Well, because it is true. There was a Time magazine a few years back (sorry, don't have the reference) that, in the context of evolution, talked about our decendance from an original 'Eve.' You see, if we are solely the product of evolution, we had to have come from a common genetic strain, a single family. The odds that two or more separate genetic strains would produce offspring that could interbreed is impossibly, stupendously huge. So Evolutionists believe we came from a single family.
Surprise-- Creationists believe the same! Whether Adam and Eve, or Noah and his family are referenced as our parent family, creationists must come to the same conclusion as evolutionists, that we come from a single family.
So, I am related to everyone else on this planet! There is no one else who has ever been born or who will ever be born who is not related to everyone else. We are all cousins! No matter how white you are, you are related to those of every other shade! (and vice versa, of course)
And this also means that Mohammed and Jesus are related (gasp!).
Here's another way of thinking about it. An individual has two parents. Each of those two parents has two parents, and each of those four grandparents has two parents, and each of those eight great-grandparents have two parents, etc. Draw this out on a piece of paper. You will see an inverted pyramid. Now if you map back a few centuries you will find you have thousands upon thousands of ancestors. Trace your lineage and you will be amazed at what you find.
Think of the wealth of knowlege we have gained by the inclusion into our culture and knowlege base individuals like Albert Einstein, William Shakespeare, Carl Jung, John Lennon, and yes, Martin Luther King Jr. You are related to all of these people, and you have inner genius and insight in you, like they did! Now think of all the individuals who, because of war or because of racism, their wealth of knowlege and insigt has been denied to you. Tragic, isn't it?